I have met Calum Clark and he's a really nice bloke. MAssive overreaction from the lot of you to not even consider that it was an accident. If you're stripping someones arm off the ball you just tug as hard as you can and hold and don't necessarily stop the second the whistle blows.

JC QuinI have met Calum Clark and he's a really nice bloke. MAssive overreaction from the lot of you to not even consider that it was an accident. If you're stripping someones arm off the ball you just tug as hard as you can and hold and don't necessarily stop the second the whistle blows.
Don't any of you actually play rugby?

If you're stripping someone's arm off the ball you don't get it off the ball then put your force into bending it the wrong way.

And all of it happened after the whistle.

Watch how modern rugby players get players off the ball. It's nothing like what Clark did. Thankfully.

Hmm, seems to have some real anger management issues. If the broken arm is a result of that incident and if it was deemed to have been done with forethought and malice then he needs to have the book thrown at him frankly.

The minimum length of ban he should receive is the same amount of time it will take Rob Hawkins to play competitive rugby again. If its 6 months then so be it why should Hawkins be the only one to suffer.
But with the saints suspending him the citing board will probably show leniacy and let him play again this season.

They showed the other angle on Sky before the Saints game, I've taken a look at the recording. Clark knows exactly where the ball is as he can see it and that doesn't stop what he's doing. It's as clear as day

Agree with the poster above who said that Clark's ban should be for at least the length of time Hawkins is out of rugby. In fact maybe this should be adopted into the citing rules - if oyu end someones career by premeditated foul play, that's the end of your career too.

Great news like i said in an earlier message on this thread if rob hawkins can't play because of the injury then neither should he. About 7 months that should make him think twice about doing that again.

I thought it might be longer, but 32 weeks is a long time, so no real complaints from me. Don't forget this hangs over Clark's head for the rest of his career. Anything else and this will be taken into consideration as they say.

ArlecchinoAs said above, most of the 32 weeks is in the off season. Should be within season ban

He was in the EPS, so his summer was potentially in season as well. They are supposed to take non-playing periods into account when they work out the bans, but I'm not sure how that can be done at the point of sentencing, especially with a borderline international like Clark.

OK, I've just read it. It seems that the ban (which was set by JJ was worse than the worst punch which would have led to a suspension of 52 weeks (top of scale). 12 weeks (the time that Hawkins is out) was then added and this amount was then halved due to remorse and character.

There was no other time scale to equate it to, so Blackett had to go with what he felt was appropriate.

The injury sounds nasty though and it looks as if it was compounded by another Saint not allowing him (Hawkins) to roll away.

I hope that Clark has a long look at himself and is able to control his aggression, otherwise a promising rugby career will be cut short. I also hope that Saints support him through this.

Says that the entry point for deliberate injury to another player (as opposed to just deliberately hurting them) is 5 yrs. They did not consider this to be deliberate injury. Clark's explanation was that he was trying to roll Hawkins away and did not realised he was pinned down, so would not roll.

Procedurally it all makes sense, right up to the bit where JJB says

Quote:

Judge Jeff BlackettSince this is a long sanction it will run continuously through the summer vacation without a break.

So, he carefully worked out the sanction and then decided that because it was "long" that an arbitrary chunk of it didn't matter. Eh?

arfaStatement from Saints saying that in light of the injury being found to be unintentional, "the club is bound to consider the merits of an appeal".
I would have thought it best to just let it go as quietly as possible

I'd have to agree - especially as Clark pleaded guilty AND his ban was effectively halved and has been allowed to run during the summer break.

Accept it, move on and have a quiet word to a few of your players would be my advice!

Bumping this for something interesting I found on another forum. My views on Clark are pretty clear - I think he's got a screw loose and we've seen it several times. I think he got very, very lucky that the panel decided the arm break was "reckless but not intentional" which given the clarity of the video replays I strongly disagree with.

Clark said this on twitter yesterday:

I have been to some dark places over the last 32 weeks. A lot of people have had a lot to say. Im going to take my turn.
@Calumclark89

I am ashamed and sorry for what happened. I have taken a long hard look in the mirror and blame nobody but myself. I have learnt a lot.
@Calumclark89

I would like to thank my club who stood by me, and my teammates who have had to carry me for such a long time.
&#8207;@Calumclark89

Today couldn't have been much tougher a challenge. Once in a lifetime. We did out best and lost.
&#8207;@Calumclark89

Thanks.
&#8207;@Calumclark89

I appreciate the fact that he's not making excuses. It's fairly clearly an admission of guilt (I appreciate that he can't actually come out and say he did it on purpose because it leaves him open to legal action - the thought had crossed my mind that the RFU panel were trying to avoid the same thing with their decision) and at no point does he try and deflect. It seems genuine. I hope he has managed to fix himself, because otherwise he's a player I don't want in our sport.

On the strength of nothing more than a few lines, I'm prepared to 'wait and see'. Certainly yesterday he went out of his way to be the peacemaker, and it'll be interesting to see whether this is truly a reformed character, or just a Joey Barton self-delusion.

We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment.
We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals.
We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards.
If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing
abuse@sportnetwork.net